Audiobus: Use your music apps together.

What is Audiobus?Audiobus is an award-winning music app for iPhone and iPad which lets you use your other music apps together. Chain effects on your favourite synth, run the output of apps or Audio Units into an app like GarageBand or Loopy, or select a different audio interface output for each app. Route MIDI between apps — drive a synth from a MIDI sequencer, or add an arpeggiator to your MIDI keyboard — or sync with your external MIDI gear. And control your entire setup from a MIDI controller.

Download on the App Store

Audiobus is the app that makes the rest of your setup better.

Jax

Does anyone know what’s happening with the developer?

I emailed the dev last year and earlier this year with no reply.

Public betas came out late last year which were sounding
very interesting to say the least and then nada.

«1

Comments

  • That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

  • edited August 2021

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    I’m not concerned about him being a small developer or his apps being updated.

    I’m concerned because there hasn’t been any news on his website and no replies to emails.
    Taking into account ,‘world matters’,
    he could possibly be unwell.

  • @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    I’m not concerned out him being a small developer or his apps being updated.

    I’m concerned because there hasn’t been any news on his website and no replies to emails.
    Taking into account ,‘world matters’,
    he could possibly be unwell.

    He’s a personal friend? You should write or call to check up on him.

  • @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    I’m not concerned out him being a small developer or his apps being updated.

    I’m concerned because there hasn’t been any news on his website and no replies to emails.
    Taking into account ,‘world matters’,
    he could possibly be unwell.

    He’s a personal friend? You should write or call to check up on him.

    I don't have a number to call and there has been no response to
    my emails otherwise I wouldn't have made a public broadcast.

  • wimwim
    edited August 2021

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    Ummm ... then virtually all the music apps on your device are high-risk. I can count the ones that aren't from independent small developers on one hand.

  • edited August 2021

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    Ummm ... then virtually all the music apps on your device are high-risk.

    LOL. Yes, I’m aware of that. Unless a developer sells their apps to another developer or company to continue their work, they will eventually no longer work with new hardware and/or iPadOS updates. It’s just the cost of doing business with a “one person” shop.

  • wimwim
    edited August 2021

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    Ummm ... then virtually all the music apps on your device are high-risk.

    LOL. Yes, I’m aware of that. Unless a developer sells their apps to another developer or company to continue their work, they will eventually no longer work with new hardware and/or iPadOS updates.

    I don't think I've ever seen that happen for a any iOS music app.
    That's why I don't get too emotionally attached to these toys, as fun as they are. ;) B)

  • Anyway, I hope all is with with the developer.

  • edited August 2021

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    Ummm ... then virtually all the music apps on your device are high-risk.

    LOL. Yes, I’m aware of that. Unless a developer sells their apps to another developer or company to continue their work, they will eventually no longer work with new hardware and/or iPadOS updates.

    I don't think I've ever seen that happen for a any iOS music app.

    I have a perfect example. The “Pearl Guitar” app, which was a very good guitar simulator. The developer(s) got to a point they no longer were addressing compatibility issues with iPadOS updates and they sold the app to an app aggregator (which is basically a company which buys up popular apps as an investment). Well, the aggregator never updated the apps they bought and Pearl Guitar eventually no longer worked. This was several years ago.

    This also happens all the time with iOS games which are bought by larger companies.

  • @wim said:
    Anyway, I hope all is with with the developer.

    So do I.

  • @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    Ummm ... then virtually all the music apps on your device are high-risk.

    LOL. Yes, I’m aware of that. Unless a developer sells their apps to another developer or company to continue their work, they will eventually no longer work with new hardware and/or iPadOS updates.

    I don't think I've ever seen that happen for a any iOS music app.

    I have a perfect example. The “Pearl Guitar” app, which was a very good guitar simulator. The developer(s) got to a point they no longer were addressing compatibility issues with iPadOS updates and they sold the app to an app aggregator (which is basically a company which buys up popular apps as an investment). Well, the aggregator never updated the apps they bought and Pearl Guitar eventually no longer worked. This was several years ago.

    This also happens all the time with iOS games which are bought by larger companies.

    Ahhh.
    Tax write offs.

  • I meant I don't recall any music apps being sold to someone else and continuing to be viable after the developer no longer can or will maintain them. They just usually simply disappear.

  • edited August 2021

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    Ummm ... then virtually all the music apps on your device are high-risk.

    LOL. Yes, I’m aware of that. Unless a developer sells their apps to another developer or company to continue their work, they will eventually no longer work with new hardware and/or iPadOS updates.

    I don't think I've ever seen that happen for a any iOS music app.

    I have a perfect example. The “Pearl Guitar” app, which was a very good guitar simulator. The developer(s) got to a point they no longer were addressing compatibility issues with iPadOS updates and they sold the app to an app aggregator (which is basically a company which buys up popular apps as an investment). Well, the aggregator never updated the apps they bought and Pearl Guitar eventually no longer worked. This was several years ago.

    This also happens all the time with iOS games which are bought by larger companies.

    Ahhh.
    Tax write offs.

    No, they buy them to squeeze them for potential profits, but they don’t maintain them because that part of the deal is costly, so they just let them follow their projected rise and decline and then buy more apps to squeeze them for a nickel.

    It’s not a great business model for users, but it obviously makes someone money.

    http://www.appholdings.org/

  • @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    Ummm ... then virtually all the music apps on your device are high-risk.

    LOL. Yes, I’m aware of that. Unless a developer sells their apps to another developer or company to continue their work, they will eventually no longer work with new hardware and/or iPadOS updates.

    I don't think I've ever seen that happen for a any iOS music app.

    I have a perfect example. The “Pearl Guitar” app, which was a very good guitar simulator. The developer(s) got to a point they no longer were addressing compatibility issues with iPadOS updates and they sold the app to an app aggregator (which is basically a company which buys up popular apps as an investment). Well, the aggregator never updated the apps they bought and Pearl Guitar eventually no longer worked. This was several years ago.

    This also happens all the time with iOS games which are bought by larger companies.

    Ahhh.
    Tax write offs.

    No, they buy them to squeeze them for potential profits, but they don’t maintain them because that part of the deal is costly, so they just let them follow their projected rise and decline and then buy more apps to squeeze them for a nickel.

    It’s not a great business model for users, but it obviously makes someone money.

    http://www.appholdings.org/

    Thanks for the info.

    So let me get this straight.

    Company comes along
    offers developer xyz amount
    developer accepts deal
    company then holds said app until
    OS updates stop them from working?
    developer has sold rights to said app
    so can’t update?

    The money that is offered to dev’s?
    What are the strings attached because
    after one look at that link you’ve posted
    it reminded me of so many record company contracts and their ,’advances’.

    Basically loan sharks.

  • edited August 2021

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    Ummm ... then virtually all the music apps on your device are high-risk.

    LOL. Yes, I’m aware of that. Unless a developer sells their apps to another developer or company to continue their work, they will eventually no longer work with new hardware and/or iPadOS updates.

    I don't think I've ever seen that happen for a any iOS music app.

    I have a perfect example. The “Pearl Guitar” app, which was a very good guitar simulator. The developer(s) got to a point they no longer were addressing compatibility issues with iPadOS updates and they sold the app to an app aggregator (which is basically a company which buys up popular apps as an investment). Well, the aggregator never updated the apps they bought and Pearl Guitar eventually no longer worked. This was several years ago.

    This also happens all the time with iOS games which are bought by larger companies.

    Ahhh.
    Tax write offs.

    No, they buy them to squeeze them for potential profits, but they don’t maintain them because that part of the deal is costly, so they just let them follow their projected rise and decline and then buy more apps to squeeze them for a nickel.

    It’s not a great business model for users, but it obviously makes someone money.

    http://www.appholdings.org/

    Thanks for the info.

    So let me get this straight.

    Company comes along
    offers developer xyz amount
    developer accepts deal
    company then holds said app until
    OS updates stop them from working?
    developer has sold rights to said app
    so can’t update?

    The money that is offered to dev’s?
    What are the strings attached because
    after one look at that link you’ve posted
    it reminded me of so many record company contracts and their ,’advances’.

    Basically loan sharks.

    I’m only saying this is one way of doing business. This particular company buys apps which have a proven sales track record from small developers and then they wring them out for all they’re worth. Let’s be fair, business is business and small developers don’t work for free. If they decide to sell their app, they’re getting out of all the associated problems of managing and updating that product. Both parties win even though the downside for customers are much higher once you get past the initial sale.

    Look at it this way: Does McDonald’s worry about a hamburger you ate a month ago, or do they want to sell you another hamburger and this time with a side of fries and a shake?

  • wimwim
    edited August 2021

    At least its not as bad as companies buying a competing product for the purpose of letting it die. Sure they would talk about "synergies" and "expanded customer options" but it was all bullshit. In my IT days the signal to begin migrating off of a system was the day that Oracle acquired it.

  • Very few (i.e. bordering on none) iOS music apps generate enough revenue for another entity to purchase the rights to the app and milk the last revenue till it dies.

  • @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    Ummm ... then virtually all the music apps on your device are high-risk.

    LOL. Yes, I’m aware of that. Unless a developer sells their apps to another developer or company to continue their work, they will eventually no longer work with new hardware and/or iPadOS updates.

    I don't think I've ever seen that happen for a any iOS music app.

    I have a perfect example. The “Pearl Guitar” app, which was a very good guitar simulator. The developer(s) got to a point they no longer were addressing compatibility issues with iPadOS updates and they sold the app to an app aggregator (which is basically a company which buys up popular apps as an investment). Well, the aggregator never updated the apps they bought and Pearl Guitar eventually no longer worked. This was several years ago.

    This also happens all the time with iOS games which are bought by larger companies.

    Ahhh.
    Tax write offs.

    No, they buy them to squeeze them for potential profits, but they don’t maintain them because that part of the deal is costly, so they just let them follow their projected rise and decline and then buy more apps to squeeze them for a nickel.

    It’s not a great business model for users, but it obviously makes someone money.

    http://www.appholdings.org/

    Thanks for the info.

    So let me get this straight.

    Company comes along
    offers developer xyz amount
    developer accepts deal
    company then holds said app until
    OS updates stop them from working?
    developer has sold rights to said app
    so can’t update?

    The money that is offered to dev’s?
    What are the strings attached because
    after one look at that link you’ve posted
    it reminded me of so many record company contracts and their ,’advances’.

    Basically loan sharks.

    I’m only saying this is one way of doing business. This particular company buys apps which have a proven sales track record from small developers and then they wring them out for all they’re worth.

    That's what record companies do to artists.
    I'll tell you about that one day.

    Let’s be fair, business is business and small developers don’t work for free. If they decide to sell their app, they’re getting out of all the associated problems of managing and updating that product. Both parties win even though the downside for customers are much higher once you get past the initial sale.

    Agreed, business is business as long as it is got ethics.
    Though ,"ethics", are few and far between these days.

    Look at it this way: Does McDonald’s worry about a hamburger you ate a month ago, or do they want to sell you another hamburger and this time with a side of fries and a shake?

    True.

    Simply put?

    I don't eat McDonald's.
    Their "food" damages the heart, liver, arteries, encourages obesity and
    the company itself has been one of the major contributors to global warming
    due to their farming in South America, namely the Amazon.

  • @wim said:
    At least its not as bad as companies buying a competing product for the purpose of letting it die.

    or dumping 500 Artists/bands at the end of the fiscal year
    and keeping all the rights to their material
    ensuring said Artists are unable to perform for the
    duration of the contract they signed + however many years.

  • @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    Ummm ... then virtually all the music apps on your device are high-risk.

    LOL. Yes, I’m aware of that. Unless a developer sells their apps to another developer or company to continue their work, they will eventually no longer work with new hardware and/or iPadOS updates.

    I don't think I've ever seen that happen for a any iOS music app.

    I have a perfect example. The “Pearl Guitar” app, which was a very good guitar simulator. The developer(s) got to a point they no longer were addressing compatibility issues with iPadOS updates and they sold the app to an app aggregator (which is basically a company which buys up popular apps as an investment). Well, the aggregator never updated the apps they bought and Pearl Guitar eventually no longer worked. This was several years ago.

    This also happens all the time with iOS games which are bought by larger companies.

    Ahhh.
    Tax write offs.

    No, they buy them to squeeze them for potential profits, but they don’t maintain them because that part of the deal is costly, so they just let them follow their projected rise and decline and then buy more apps to squeeze them for a nickel.

    It’s not a great business model for users, but it obviously makes someone money.

    http://www.appholdings.org/

    Thanks for the info.

    So let me get this straight.

    Company comes along
    offers developer xyz amount
    developer accepts deal
    company then holds said app until
    OS updates stop them from working?
    developer has sold rights to said app
    so can’t update?

    The money that is offered to dev’s?
    What are the strings attached because
    after one look at that link you’ve posted
    it reminded me of so many record company contracts and their ,’advances’.

    Basically loan sharks.

    I’m only saying this is one way of doing business. This particular company buys apps which have a proven sales track record from small developers and then they wring them out for all they’re worth.

    That's what record companies do to artists.
    I'll tell you about that one day.

    Let’s be fair, business is business and small developers don’t work for free. If they decide to sell their app, they’re getting out of all the associated problems of managing and updating that product. Both parties win even though the downside for customers are much higher once you get past the initial sale.

    Agreed, business is business as long as it is got ethics.
    Though ,"ethics", are few and far between these days.

    Look at it this way: Does McDonald’s worry about a hamburger you ate a month ago, or do they want to sell you another hamburger and this time with a side of fries and a shake?

    True.

    Simply put?

    I don't eat McDonald's.
    Their "food" damages the heart, liver, arteries, encourages obesity and
    the company itself has been one of the major contributors to global warming
    due to their farming in South America, namely the Amazon.

    I know you understand my point. And from the point of view of the aggregator (which is the same as the point of view of the record label), an app is a hit today but it won’t be a hit forever. And most apps/music acts have very short sales curves/careers.

  • @espiegel123 said:
    Very few (i.e. bordering on none) iOS music apps generate enough revenue for another entity to purchase the rights to the app and milk the last revenue till it dies.

    Yeah, I've noticed that.

    Most of us are here for the love of it rather profit.

    It's also happens to be the most exciting edge of music tech at the moment.

  • @Gravitas said:

    @wim said:
    At least its not as bad as companies buying a competing product for the purpose of letting it die.

    or dumping 500 Artists/bands at the end of the fiscal year
    and keeping all the rights to their material
    ensuring said Artists are unable to perform for the
    duration of the contract they signed + however many years.

    Know what is my response to that? Don’t sign with a label or just start a new band. Everyone has to make a living. How you or I choose to do that won’t be right for someone else.

  • @Gravitas said:
    Does anyone know what’s happening with the developer?

    I emailed the dev last year and earlier this year with no reply.

    Public betas came out late last year which were sounding
    very interesting to say the least and then nada.

    This email? mailto:[email protected]

  • edited August 2021

    @onerez said:

    @Gravitas said:
    Does anyone know what’s happening with the developer?

    I emailed the dev last year and earlier this year with no reply.

    Public betas came out late last year which were sounding
    very interesting to say the least and then nada.

    This email? mailto:[email protected]

    Here’s his site.

    https://midi.digitster.com/

    And this bizarre rant is also part of the dev’s site. This is extremely unprofessional and certainly doesn’t imbue one with confidence in their offerings.

    https://midi.digitster.com/DCCC.html

    Openly bitching to your customers about how hard it is to make money or how much time it takes you to do something is not the sign of a stable business.

    Also, I have nothing against this developer (after all, I don’t even know them), but their site is riddled with spelling errors, which is another negative. Appearances matter and details matter. Maybe this particular developer would be better off working for another company? Running and maintaining a business is not for everyone.

  • @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    Ummm ... then virtually all the music apps on your device are high-risk.

    LOL. Yes, I’m aware of that. Unless a developer sells their apps to another developer or company to continue their work, they will eventually no longer work with new hardware and/or iPadOS updates.

    I don't think I've ever seen that happen for a any iOS music app.

    I have a perfect example. The “Pearl Guitar” app, which was a very good guitar simulator. The developer(s) got to a point they no longer were addressing compatibility issues with iPadOS updates and they sold the app to an app aggregator (which is basically a company which buys up popular apps as an investment). Well, the aggregator never updated the apps they bought and Pearl Guitar eventually no longer worked. This was several years ago.

    This also happens all the time with iOS games which are bought by larger companies.

    Ahhh.
    Tax write offs.

    No, they buy them to squeeze them for potential profits, but they don’t maintain them because that part of the deal is costly, so they just let them follow their projected rise and decline and then buy more apps to squeeze them for a nickel.

    It’s not a great business model for users, but it obviously makes someone money.

    http://www.appholdings.org/

    Thanks for the info.

    So let me get this straight.

    Company comes along
    offers developer xyz amount
    developer accepts deal
    company then holds said app until
    OS updates stop them from working?
    developer has sold rights to said app
    so can’t update?

    The money that is offered to dev’s?
    What are the strings attached because
    after one look at that link you’ve posted
    it reminded me of so many record company contracts and their ,’advances’.

    Basically loan sharks.

    I’m only saying this is one way of doing business. This particular company buys apps which have a proven sales track record from small developers and then they wring them out for all they’re worth.

    That's what record companies do to artists.
    I'll tell you about that one day.

    Let’s be fair, business is business and small developers don’t work for free. If they decide to sell their app, they’re getting out of all the associated problems of managing and updating that product. Both parties win even though the downside for customers are much higher once you get past the initial sale.

    Agreed, business is business as long as it is got ethics.
    Though ,"ethics", are few and far between these days.

    Look at it this way: Does McDonald’s worry about a hamburger you ate a month ago, or do they want to sell you another hamburger and this time with a side of fries and a shake?

    True.

    Simply put?

    I don't eat McDonald's.
    Their "food" damages the heart, liver, arteries, encourages obesity and
    the company itself has been one of the major contributors to global warming
    due to their farming in South America, namely the Amazon.

    I know you understand my point. And from the point of view of the aggregator (which is the same as the point of view of the record label), an app is a hit today but it won’t be a hit forever. And most apps/music acts have very short sales curves/careers.

    From having been and still am an active creative?
    An Artist still creates when no one is looking.

    I don't look for flavour of the month.
    I like at Rembrandt's, Mozart's, Picasso's, Miles Davis's etc, etc.

  • @NeuM said:

    @onerez said:

    @Gravitas said:
    Does anyone know what’s happening with the developer?

    I emailed the dev last year and earlier this year with no reply.

    Public betas came out late last year which were sounding
    very interesting to say the least and then nada.

    This email? mailto:[email protected]

    Yup.
    That email.

  • edited August 2021

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    Ummm ... then virtually all the music apps on your device are high-risk.

    LOL. Yes, I’m aware of that. Unless a developer sells their apps to another developer or company to continue their work, they will eventually no longer work with new hardware and/or iPadOS updates.

    I don't think I've ever seen that happen for a any iOS music app.

    I have a perfect example. The “Pearl Guitar” app, which was a very good guitar simulator. The developer(s) got to a point they no longer were addressing compatibility issues with iPadOS updates and they sold the app to an app aggregator (which is basically a company which buys up popular apps as an investment). Well, the aggregator never updated the apps they bought and Pearl Guitar eventually no longer worked. This was several years ago.

    This also happens all the time with iOS games which are bought by larger companies.

    Ahhh.
    Tax write offs.

    No, they buy them to squeeze them for potential profits, but they don’t maintain them because that part of the deal is costly, so they just let them follow their projected rise and decline and then buy more apps to squeeze them for a nickel.

    It’s not a great business model for users, but it obviously makes someone money.

    http://www.appholdings.org/

    Thanks for the info.

    So let me get this straight.

    Company comes along
    offers developer xyz amount
    developer accepts deal
    company then holds said app until
    OS updates stop them from working?
    developer has sold rights to said app
    so can’t update?

    The money that is offered to dev’s?
    What are the strings attached because
    after one look at that link you’ve posted
    it reminded me of so many record company contracts and their ,’advances’.

    Basically loan sharks.

    I’m only saying this is one way of doing business. This particular company buys apps which have a proven sales track record from small developers and then they wring them out for all they’re worth.

    That's what record companies do to artists.
    I'll tell you about that one day.

    Let’s be fair, business is business and small developers don’t work for free. If they decide to sell their app, they’re getting out of all the associated problems of managing and updating that product. Both parties win even though the downside for customers are much higher once you get past the initial sale.

    Agreed, business is business as long as it is got ethics.
    Though ,"ethics", are few and far between these days.

    Look at it this way: Does McDonald’s worry about a hamburger you ate a month ago, or do they want to sell you another hamburger and this time with a side of fries and a shake?

    True.

    Simply put?

    I don't eat McDonald's.
    Their "food" damages the heart, liver, arteries, encourages obesity and
    the company itself has been one of the major contributors to global warming
    due to their farming in South America, namely the Amazon.

    I know you understand my point. And from the point of view of the aggregator (which is the same as the point of view of the record label), an app is a hit today but it won’t be a hit forever. And most apps/music acts have very short sales curves/careers.

    From having been and still am an active creative?
    An Artist still creates when no one is looking.

    I don't look for flavour of the month.
    I like at Rembrandt's, Mozart's, Picasso's, Miles Davis's etc, etc.

    If there’s something I’ve learned in my life, it’s that people have differing opinions about literally everything and there’s no singular “right answer” for anything.

  • @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @Gravitas said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:

    @wim said:

    @NeuM said:
    That’s the risk of dealing with an independent, small developer. The upside is they are often far more responsive to requests. The downside is they decide to quit or can’t continue, then you’re out of luck.

    Ummm ... then virtually all the music apps on your device are high-risk.

    LOL. Yes, I’m aware of that. Unless a developer sells their apps to another developer or company to continue their work, they will eventually no longer work with new hardware and/or iPadOS updates.

    I don't think I've ever seen that happen for a any iOS music app.

    I have a perfect example. The “Pearl Guitar” app, which was a very good guitar simulator. The developer(s) got to a point they no longer were addressing compatibility issues with iPadOS updates and they sold the app to an app aggregator (which is basically a company which buys up popular apps as an investment). Well, the aggregator never updated the apps they bought and Pearl Guitar eventually no longer worked. This was several years ago.

    This also happens all the time with iOS games which are bought by larger companies.

    Ahhh.
    Tax write offs.

    No, they buy them to squeeze them for potential profits, but they don’t maintain them because that part of the deal is costly, so they just let them follow their projected rise and decline and then buy more apps to squeeze them for a nickel.

    It’s not a great business model for users, but it obviously makes someone money.

    http://www.appholdings.org/

    Thanks for the info.

    So let me get this straight.

    Company comes along
    offers developer xyz amount
    developer accepts deal
    company then holds said app until
    OS updates stop them from working?
    developer has sold rights to said app
    so can’t update?

    The money that is offered to dev’s?
    What are the strings attached because
    after one look at that link you’ve posted
    it reminded me of so many record company contracts and their ,’advances’.

    Basically loan sharks.

    I’m only saying this is one way of doing business. This particular company buys apps which have a proven sales track record from small developers and then they wring them out for all they’re worth.

    That's what record companies do to artists.
    I'll tell you about that one day.

    Let’s be fair, business is business and small developers don’t work for free. If they decide to sell their app, they’re getting out of all the associated problems of managing and updating that product. Both parties win even though the downside for customers are much higher once you get past the initial sale.

    Agreed, business is business as long as it is got ethics.
    Though ,"ethics", are few and far between these days.

    Look at it this way: Does McDonald’s worry about a hamburger you ate a month ago, or do they want to sell you another hamburger and this time with a side of fries and a shake?

    True.

    Simply put?

    I don't eat McDonald's.
    Their "food" damages the heart, liver, arteries, encourages obesity and
    the company itself has been one of the major contributors to global warming
    due to their farming in South America, namely the Amazon.

    I know you understand my point. And from the point of view of the aggregator (which is the same as the point of view of the record label), an app is a hit today but it won’t be a hit forever. And most apps/music acts have very short sales curves/careers.

    From having been and still am an active creative?
    An Artist still creates when no one is looking.

    I don't look for flavour of the month.
    I like at Rembrandt's, Mozart's, Picasso's, Miles Davis's etc, etc.

    If there’s something I’ve learned in my life, it’s that people have differing opinions about literally everything and there’s no one “right answer” for anything.

    Agreed.

  • @NeuM said:
    If there’s something I’ve learned in my life, it’s that people have differing opinions about literally everything and there’s no singular “right answer” for anything.

    No one cares about truth or right answers anymore. Its about opinions, echo chambers, and feefees.
    Nobody believes anything anymore.

  • @AlmostAnonymous said:

    @NeuM said:
    If there’s something I’ve learned in my life, it’s that people have differing opinions about literally everything and there’s no singular “right answer” for anything.

    No one cares about truth or right answers anymore. Its about opinions, echo chambers, and feefees.
    Nobody believes anything anymore.

    If everyone believed in the same things, wouldn’t life be a bit boring and predictable? I don’t mind that other people have different opinions, as long as we treat each other respectfully and don’t try to hurt others it’s all good.

Sign In or Register to comment.